Close
Loopholes in National
Organic Standards, May 12
Public Comment Deadline(Beyond
Pesticides, May 8, 2006) The
USDA National Organic Program has issued a major rule
proposal with a very brief comment period. These proposed regulations
impact the standards that govern the conversion of dairy livestock to
organic, and the use of synthetic substances in or on processed organic
products. These regulation changes are required by the final judgment
in Harvey
v. Johanns and are needed to implement the amendment to the Organic
Foods Production Act adopted by Congress on November 10, 2005.

IMPORTANT:
COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY MAY 12.

The rules the USDA
has proposed are not clear or complete and could cause confusion for
farmers and in the marketplace. Please add your voice to the many who
will tell USDA to get the regulations right this time! Here is an overview
of the problems with the regulations as proposed, and below is the address
to write to.

TRANSITION
OF DAIRY LIVESTOCK INTO ORGANIC PRODUCTION

The proposed Rule
does not clarify the standards for conversion of dairy livestock to
organic. Under this proposal it is still unclear whether a certified
dairy operation must manage any new milking cows: 1) from the last third
of gestation, or 2) no later than one year prior to the production of
organic milk or milk products. It is our position that after a farm
transitions to organic, all replacement animals should be managed organically
from the last third of gestation to close the loophole that allows many
replacement dairy animals to be raised conventionally and transitioned
to organic management.

Why
is This Important? If this correction is not made, some
operators and certifying agents may interpret the rule as allowing for
the continuous conversion of conventional heifers to organic production.
Without closing this loophole, animals converted this way could be treated
conventionally for their first year or so of life, including feed made
from genetically engineered soy and corn, as well as the use of antibiotics
and growth hormones. In addition, such a loophole would continue to
undermine those farmers who raise organic heifers, as well as suppress
the market demand for organic heifers, making them less available.

(a) Livestock products that are to be sold, labeled, or represented
as organic must be from livestock under continuous organic management
from the last third of gestation or hatching: Except, That: …

(2) Dairy animals conversion of herds. Milk or milk products must
be from animals that have been under continuous organic management
beginning no later than 1 year prior to the production of the milk
or milk products that are to be sold, labeled, or represented as organic.
Except that crops and forage from land, included in the organic system
plan of a dairy farm, that is in the third year of organic management
may be consumed by the dairy animals of the farm during the 12 month
period immediately prior to the sale of organic milk and milk products.
(3) Dairy animals - replacement stock. Once an operation has been
certified for organic dairy production, all dairy animals, including
all young stock whether born on or brought onto the operation, shall
be under organic management from the last third of gestation.

SYNTHETIC SUBSTANCES

The Department incorrectly
believes that no rule-making is necessary on the issue of the use of
synthetic substances in or on processed products, because they contend
that the part of the Congressional Amendment to OFPA "fixed"
what Harvey had undone. Yet while the Congressional amendment allowed
synthetic ingredients in food labeled organic, it left out the existing,
pre-Harvey list of criteria that has been used by the NOSB to evaluate
"synthetic substances."

Why
is This Important? Because the Congressional Amendment
only refers to "ingredients," it leaves a large loophole for
many other non-ingredient synthetic substances used in food processing,
including "food contact substances" and other processing aids.
This could allow their unlimited use without review by the National
Organic Standards Board. This Regulation must make the NOSB review process
as rigorous as possible, including strong criteria used in these evaluations.
Regulatory criteria are established for evaluation of synthetic substances
used for both crop and livestock production. Criteria should be re-instated
for processing substances, and should apply to all substances used in
processing.

1) Tell
the Department to: Apply the criteria in §205.600(b) to all synthetic
substances being reviewed for inclusion on the National List. Rewrite §205.600(b) to read:
"(b) In addition to the criteria set forth in the Act, any synthetic
substance used in organic processing will be evaluated against the following
criteria:…"

The Department also
has a "Policy Statement" still posted on the NOP website which
specifically exempts the entire class of FDA "Food Contact Substances"
(all 555 of them!) from any NOSB review. This policy statement is in
direct conflict with the Organic Foods Production Act and the court
order. [Go to www.cfsan.fda.gov/%7Edms/opa-fcn.html to see the list
of Food contact Substances]

2) Tell
the Department to: Close the loophole the National Organic Standards
Board must review ALL synthetic materials used in organic processing,
including all synthetic substances as well as ingredients. Tell the
Department to specifically: Withdraw the Policy Statement of December
12, 2002, entitled: Synthetic Substances Subject to Review and Recommendation
by the National Organic Standards Board When Such Substances are Used
as Ingredients in Processed Food Products

"COMMERCIAL
UN-AVAILABILITY"

The Amendment to
OFPA gave the Secretary the ability to "develop emergency procedures
for designating agricultural products that are commercially unavailable
in organic form for placement on the National List for a period of time
not to exceed 12 months.''

Why
is This Important? The Department has not proposed guideline
regulations for these procedures. Without such regulations, it is unclear
how such "emergency procedures" will be implemented.

Tell the
Department:If USDA intends to exercise the authority
granted under this amendment, they must do Rulemaking to clarify under
what conditions and criteria the Secretary shall determine agricultural
products [in the 5% portion of an organic processed product] to be "Commercially
Unavailable." This Rulemaking must include a 60-day comment period.TAKE ACTION:
Use the analysis
above to help in forming your comments. The bold text gives you specific
language to use in your comments to make the message clear and consistent.